Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy

Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

EliyahuQeoni wrote:

It isn't a philosophy. It isn't a way of life.

I must have missed the post in which someone argued Star Trek ever was or should be a "philosophy" or a "way of life."

sariel2005 wrote:

Of course, we have many reasons to think that the TNG seasons would also be split between two Earth years: the very few Earth dates mentioned (such as that for First Contact, or the Hindu festival of lights) all systematically support a season that starts after the summer, not after Christmas.

Thats interesting I had assumed that they sort of knew how it worked by the time of TNG and were just fudging with TOS.
But TNG is ambigous as well?

If you factor in DS9, it's all kinds of confusion. When Ben Sisko takes command of DS9, it's stardate 46xxx (the sixth season of TNG). We are told three years have passed since Wolf 359, but if the second digit in a stardate represents a year, only a little over two years have passed (and indeed, only two TV seasons passed between TNG's "Best of Both Worlds Part 2" and DS9's "Emissary"). You could say, okay, they're just rounding up. Fine. But then right at the beginning of the next season of DS9, when just three TV seasons have passed (and the stardate has advanced from 44xxx to 47xxx) we're told that four years have passed since Wolf 359.